On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 1:58 AM, Dale Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Greetings, we will be running a setup where our > resources are about 100 IP addresses, each with an > associated instance of pound (the web proxy/load > balancer), spread across three host machines. > > We are thinking about our resource grouping > configuration. The obvious scheme would be to just > have about 100 resource groups, one for each pair of > IP/pound instances. Another method might be to have a > small number of large resource groups, maybe 6 each > with about 16 IPs and pound instances. In theory this > might make it easier to manually move resources from > one node to another. > > Does anyone have any reason to think either scheme > would be preferable? Would it be notably difficult to > add or shift around resources with the second scheme? > Are there any constraints or quirks in linux-ha that > we might run into with either setup? Thanks.
either should be fine. the only thing thats possibly a downside for the second option is that you have to move whole groups around. _______________________________________________ Linux-HA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
